the law, that they ventured to restore him to liberty*. The bill passed without further impediment.

CHAP. XXXIII.

1778.

Fox's motion

Burgoyne.

In the committee on the state of the nation, Mr. Fox, guided by the papers which had been communi- 19th March. cated to the House, moved two propositions for cen- relative to suring Lord George Germaine on the subject of General General Burgoyne's disaster. He expected to be answered that the plan of the expedition was the General's; but the papers proved the contrary; his plan was departed from, and altered invariably for the worse. The only motive for leaving Canada was to force his way to Albany, and join Sir William Howe; but orders were given to one party only. The first proposition was rejected on a divisiont, and Mr. Fox, indignantly tearing the other paper, declared he would make no more motions. On the suggestion of Mr. Wedderburne, it was voted that the failure of the expedition from Canada was not caused by any neglect in the Secretary of State; but the resolution was not reported to the House.

England.

By favour of Congress, General Burgoyne was per- Burgoyne's mitted to return to England on his parole: a court of return to enquiry, composed of general officers, pronounced their authority incompetent to an adjudication of his case, while a prisoner on parole under the convention. He demanded an audience of the King; but was refused, on the ground of an established etiquette, which forbids the appearance at court of persons under his circumstances‡. He enjoyed, however, before the

In the liberal vigilance of Lord Mansfield, the Roman Catholics found effectual protection from such persecution. In a letter to the Rev. Mr. Cole (8th September, 1770, British Museum, additional MSS. 6400, No. 66, fo. 106), Father Bedingfield thus expresses himself: "As to persecution, I hope now it will cease. I don't hear of any more popish priests to be tried, since Lord Mansfield baffled "that wretch Payne, who prosecuted B. Chandler. When my Lord asked him "what he had to allege against the criminal, he answered, he believed him to be a popish priest. And what reason have you to believe that, Mr. Payne? were you ever at Rome? or did you see him ordained? No, replied Payne; but I "heard him say Dominus vobiscum, and preach in a popish conventicle. Judge: "And pray, Mr. Payne, may not you or I say Dominus vobiscum, pray in Latin, or pretend to preach? Yet I am of opinion there is not one in the court takes us "for Romish priests. The poor witness, having not a word to say for himself, "sneaked away, laughed at by every one.' On these parliamentary proceedings in general, see Plowden's History of Ireland, vol. i. p. 458, et seqq.

+ 164 to 44.

Letter from General Burgoyne to his constituents.

CHAP. XXXIII.

1778. 26th May. His defence

in the House of Commons.

termination of the session, a partial opportunity of
vindicating his conduct, in consequence of a motion
by Mr. Vyner, seconded by Mr. Wilkes, and amended
by Mr. Fox, for a committee to consider the transactions
of the northern army, the convention at Saratoga, and
the means by which the General obtained his release.
General Burgoyne declared his intention to have moved
for papers of great importance, but, for the present,
contented himself with supporting the amendment.
He justified his mode of employing the Indians; but
avowed that their services were overvalued, sometimes
insignificant, often barbarous, always capricious, and
the employment of them only justifiable, when, by
being united to a regular army, they could be kept
under controul, and made subservient to a general
system. He wished, on this head, to avail himself of
the evidence of M. St. Luc de Corne, who had com-
manded, and was well acquainted with the manners of
the Indians; he denied all the ravages imputed to his
army, asserting that not more than one accident by fire
happened during their
progress. After describing, as
accurately as he could, the condition of the surren
dered force, the general adverted to his own situation:
an enquiry, he said, had been commenced in his
absence; papers submitted to the House, imperfect in
some respects, redundant in others, particularly in the
disclosure of a confidential letter, the offspring of a
warm and unsuspicious heart, which he had written to
the Secretary of State, and of which advantage had
been taken to insinuate that he solicited employ. He
defended his progress in the campaign, refuting several
calumnious fabrications; such as, that Generals Philips
and Frazer were averse to the passage of Hudson's
river, and that his army was encumbered with an
enormous and unnecessary mass of artillery and bag-
gage. The two generals were the eyes and hands
with which he conducted all military operations; able
advisers, faithful friends, they felt for his difficulties,
but never uttered a syllable implying preference of
an alternative. His communications with General
Frazer were those of unrestrained friendship; affec-

tion and good wishes to his commanding officer composed the last sentence he uttered. No more artillery accompanied the army than the field train destined for the expedition when Sir Guy Carleton expected to conduct it, and all baggage of bulk, to the abridgment of many material comforts, was cheerfully left behind by the officers; some of them had not beds; many lay in soldiers' tents; and none had more than the common necessaries for active service. He complained bitterly of his reception on his return; and averting all blame from his army, avowed himself the only criminal, if there was really any crime, and solicited an enquiry, "putting all the interests that hang "most emphatically by the heart-strings of man, his fortune, his honour, his head, almost his salvation, on "the test."

The answer to these remarks by Lord George Germaine was short: an explanation was required on three particulars, which he would afford; as to the confidential letter, it was accidentally put among the official papers, and by that means sent by the clerks with the others, for which he expressed his concern. Mons. St. Luc had introduced himself to the Secretary of State, as a man who had performed great services at the head of the savages; and in conversation asserted, that General Burgoyne was a fine officer with regulars, but did not seem to like the savages, nor did he take the proper steps to retain their good-will: he was un brave homme, mais lourd comme un Allemand. The refusal of access to the sovereign, till his conduct had undergone a military enquiry, was justified by precedent. His Lordship concluded, that, as military men were the most proper judges, he did not see the propriety of parliamentary interference.

The amendment and the original motion were both rejected on a division*. The subject was entered into more at length, fresh papers communicated, and evidence examined in the next session.

In the course of this debate, Mr. Temple Luttrell

* 144 to 95.

CHAP.

XXXIII.

1778.

CHAP. XXXIII.

1778. Altercation

between Mr. Luttrell and

Germaine.

made insulting allusions to the court martial on Lord George Germaine, and his subsequent disgrace by George II. Why should he be partially acquitted to the prejudice of a gallant officer, whose only crime had avowedly been that he was too zealous, too brave, too Lord George enterprizing, too anxious for the good of his country, had strictly obeyed his orders, and performed all that British valour could effect in executing the minister's plan. Had he, on the contrary, receded from his colours, disobeyed the commands of his superiors, and hid himself from danger, such conduct would have given him pretensions to the patronage of the First Lord of the Treasury, and the honours and emoluments of the American Secretary.

7th April.

The Duke of

Richmond's motion for

withdrawing

the troops from America.

Lord George Germaine replied, he never was personal in the House, nor ever by his conduct merited such an attack; he despised the honourable member, but would level himself with his wretched character and malice; old as he was, he would meet that fighting gentleman, and be revenged. The House called to order: the Speaker reprimanded both members, and insisted on their promise that the affair should be no further prosecuted. Lord George Germaine apologized for his warmth, and Mr. Luttrell, after attempting to escape from the House, and standing in contumacy till he had nearly been taken into custody by the serjeant at arms, acknowledged his error, and said he meant his reflections as public matter, not as private abuse or enmity.

The committee on the state of the nation closed in the House of Lords with a motion by the Duke of Richmond for an address, recapitulating the expenses, misconduct, and losses of the war, and beseeching the King to withdraw his forces from America, and dismiss the ministry. Lord Weymouth opposed it, observing that all the circumstances stated as facts had been already rejected by the committee. Our situation with respect to France should prevent the House from adopting a proposition which indicated the country to be in a defenceless state; and to request the King to withdraw his armies, was an improper inteference with

his just prerogative. The same prerogative extended to the appointment or removal of ministers; if guilty of misconduct, they were open to public enquiry; and, if convicted on competent proof, objects of parliamentary complaint, and of parliamentary prayer for removal. It had been asked, did ministers consider their places as their freeholds? Did they hold them as a matter of right? Did they deem their dismission from employment a punishment? Certainly not. The King, who honoured them with his commands, could, whenever he pleased, dispense with their services; and when his Majesty thought that proper, no member of administration would consider himself punished.

CHAP.

XXXIII.

Lord

1777.

Before he made this motion, the Duke of Rich- Sentiments of mond had communicated a draft of it to Lord Chatham. Chatham. Aware of the wide difference in their opinions on the independence of America, of the weight and ability of the peers who espoused the same sentiments, and anxious to conciliate the sentiments of all parts of the opposition, he expressed much regret that his lordship had not attended the business in its progress through the House, and particularly that there should appear any want of that union and confidence which Lord Chatham had before strongly recommended. His Grace hoped that the difference between them was more apparent than real; for, as both saw the impracticability of compelling America to subjection by war, it remained only to consider the more or less sanguine expectations they might form of what could be obtained by their consent. Lord Chatham's 6th. answer was cold and repulsive. After thanking his Grace for the great honour of this communication, he expressed "unspeakable concern at finding himself "under so very wide a difference with the Duke as "between the sovereignty and allegiance of America, "that he despaired of bringing about successfully any "honourable issue*."

On the following day, struggling for a momentary victory over disease, he made his appearance in the

His appearance in the

House of
Lords.